Kerala High Court
Unknown vs By Adv. Sri.S.R.Sreejith on 9 April, 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.VINOD CHANDRAN
&
THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE M.R.ANITHA
FRIDAY, THE 09TH DAY OF APRIL 2021 / 19TH CHAITHRA, 1943
WP(Crl.).No.94 OF 2021
PETITIONER
ROY ALOYSIOUS, AGED 25 YEARS
S/O.ALOYSIOUS, RESIDING AT KATTUNGAL HOUSE,
KATTOOR, KALAVOOR, ALAPPUZHA, PIN - 688 522,
ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT.
BY ADV. SRI.S.R.SREEJITH
RESPONDENTS
1 THOMASKUTTY K.A., AGED 60 YEARS
KUTTIKKAD HOUSE, VECHUCHIRA, KUNNAM, RANNI,
PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT, PIN - 686 511.
2 ROY, AGED 30 YEARS
KUTTIKKAD HOUSE, PERINAD, CHENNAMPARA,
PATHANAMTHITTA, PIN - 686 511.
3 THE CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE
VECHUCHIRA POLICE STATION, PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT
- 689 645.
4 THE DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE
PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT - 689 645.
5 THE STATE OF KERALA
REPRESENTED BY THE HOME SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF
HOME AFFAIRS, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, TRIVANDRUM -
695 001.
SENIOR GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.K.B.RAMANAND
THIS WRIT PETITION (CRIMINAL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON
09.04.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
W.P(Crl).94/2021
2
JUDGMENT
Dated : 9th April, 2021
M.R.Anitha, J.
1. This writ petition has been filed alleging that
the detenue is under the illegal detention of the
1st respondent.
2. According to the petitioner, for the last one
year, the petitioner and the alleged detenue were
working together at Yenopoya Specialty Hospital,
Mangalore as staff Nurse. From there, they got
acquainted with each other and fell in love. The
2nd respondent is the Nephew of the 1 st respondent.
Petitioner produced Annexure-P1 to prove that he
had been a Staff Nurse attached to Yenepoya
Specialty Hospital, Mangalore. Ext.P2 is the
photographs of the petitioner with the alleged
dtenue. According to the petitioner even though
he informed the 1st respondent about their
intention to marry, they did not agree for the
W.P(Crl).94/2021
marriage alleging that the petitioner is a Latin
Catholic and the detenue is a Syrian Catholic.
Petitioner and the alleged detenue decided to
live together as husband and wife as per the
provisions of the Special Marriage Act after
completing all the legal formalities. But
respondents 1 and 2 knowing all about their
decision, took the detenue from Yenepoya
Specialty Hospital, Mangalore and according to
him, now she is under the illegal custody of
respondents 1 and 2.
3. Notice was issued to the respondents. Respondents
3 to 5 appeared through the learned Government
Pleader and the 3rd respondent was also directed
to get a statement of the alleged detenue.
Accordingly the learned Government Pleader filed
a statement of the alleged detenue with a report
of SHO, Veechoochira.
4. The alleged detenue in her statement, admitted
the relationship with the petitioner. According
W.P(Crl).94/2021
to her, the family members are not interested in
their relationship. It is also stated by her that
the petitioner compelled her for conducting a
register marriage for which she was not willing.
On 28.9.2020 he tied a thali in front of a Holy
Cross Chappel for his assurance. They never
resided together and she had been residing in the
hostel only. On enquiry by her family members
about the petitioner in his native place, it was
informed that there was a previous case against
the petitioner in connection with another girl.
Petitioner is also having the habit of consuming
liquor, smokes and is apprehended to have
substance abuse. According to her, her life with
the petitioner would not be safe and hence she
withdrew from the relationship on her own.
According to her, she is not under illegal
confinement of anybody and she wants to live with
her parents. The report filed by the SHO is also
in tune with the statement given by the alleged
detenue.
W.P(Crl).94/2021
5. From the above it can be deduced that earlier
daughter of the first respondent had a
relationship with the petitioner. But she on an
enquiry about the character of the petitioner was
not satisfied about his antecedents. Hence she
herself withdrew from his company. There is
nothing to infer any illegal confinement of the
daughter of the 1st respondent at the hands of
respondents 1 and 2. So the Writ petition is
found to be devoid of any merit and hence
dismissed.
Sd/-
K.VINOD CHANDRAN, Judge
Sd/-
M.R.ANITHA, Judge
Mrcs/9.4.
W.P(Crl).94/2021
APPENDIX
EXHIBITS
EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE IDENTITY CARD OF THE
PETITIONER ISSUED FROM YENEPOYA SPECIALITY
HOSPITAL, MANGALORE.
EXHIBIT P2 PHOTOGRAPHS SHOWING THE INTIMACY BETWEEN
THE PETITIONER AND THE DETINUE.
